Jindal is weak. One of his female staffers had her leg broken in four places by anarchists outside an event he was hosting a few years ago.

Not only was the governor ineffective in calling for more police protection as the angry crowd massed outside the restaurant, but AFAIK the perpetrator of the crime was never apprehended.

we need to trust the intelligence of the American people and we need to stop insulting the intelligence of the voters.”

__

Because the American people are so intelligent they believed that Mitt Romney was going to outlaw tampons?

Steps away from the ledge....

Seems to me Jindal is stuck on stupid, just a little.

School choice.  Mitt mentioned it vaguely.  Totally missed opportunity.

All the answers seem to be the same.

We must become Democrats.

No, thank you.

What I'm less sure of is whether we'll find someone who can carry the message to the GOP

I hear Big Bird is looking for a gig...

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 13, 2012 11:17 AM (GsoHv)

I would like him better than the choom, or even better than Romney.  But his comments there were stupid. As I said, he needs to talk to Haley and learn how to interface.

And we don't need to be talking about more damn regulation.  That is surrendering before the battle even starts.

The Bahamas is looking better all the time.

"...or is it too late?"

In the words of Ronnie James Dio, "Welcome to forever/Welcome, it's too late."

We've hit Rand's inversion point.

Let. It. Burn.

The big problem we face now is that it won't burn down quick enough. We have the power to debase the currency for decades to keep this idiocy going.

A long, slow decline. Damn I'm glad I'm old. I'm in the last generation of Americans (Boomers) to have it good. The young and middle-aged are screwed.

Jindal is an idiot who can't see beyond his own nose.   When he wakes up and realizes Romney lost because Romneycare kept  a huge chunk of the GOP electorate at home, when he realizes that you can't win a f'ing election by trying to be a carbon copy of your opponent, then maybe we can listen to him.

As it is, you GOP establishment folks and bloggers who are trying to grasp for a nominee straight from the suburbs who won't defend conservatism, you're all just barking up the wrong tree.  I know your plans; nominate some squishy moderate Republican who we agree with 40% of the time and have hope that the moderates will turn out in force for him.

Doesn't work that way, time to get the Tea Party to leave the GOP.

Posted by: bellaz at November 13, 2012 11:27 AM (4IKUP)

That's a very good intermediate move, and it will buy you sme time. Everyone who wants to work for a living should leave CA as soon as possible.

Yeah, Jindal has a point.

Let's beat up on successful people, take their money and give it to people who will vote for us.

Great plan.

Jindal has done a good job in Louisiana.  The swamps of Louisiana politics were almost as bad as Washington is becoming.  He may offend some sometimes, but generally he is on the right track.  But from many of the comments I read above, these are the same people that gave the Republican Party Aiken, Moordock and the witch.  At least Jindal doesn't make stupid comments about rape and brooms. 

I'm sure we'll get plenty of ideas about getting back to our roots and come up with innovative ideas for the challenges facing the country.

Innovative? Either we stand for less government or we don’t. Bush considered No Child Left Behind to be “innovative.” Yes, it’s hard to get elected saying “Vote for me, I promise to do less.” But that’s the challenge.

For political purposes, we do need alternatives to liberal ideas, rather than just say NO. That would have helped on health care. School choice is a decent rhetorical alternative, though, like most health care alternatives, it avoids the real cause of the problem.

What I'm less sure of is whether we'll find someone who can carry the message to the GOP and the wider electorate and even if we can do people want those kinds of solutions or is it too late?

Too late? Ed Morrissey “Time to cut a deal on immigration”:

I argue that the prospect of another four years of divided governance in Washington means another four years of unsecured borders and a broken visa system without agreeing to compromise, which should be unacceptable to everyone. Nearly a decade of waiting for total control and an insistence on a hard-line solution hasnÂ’t brought us any closer to political victoryÂ…. I have always had a borders-and-visas-first, all-else-is-negotiable position on immigration reform. The reason IÂ’m writing this now Â… again Â… is that our window for even getting that much is closing.

http://tinyurl.com/ahxbdus

Even Jindal, as much as I respect him, seems to think we can tweek things and be OK.

We're already over the cliff.  I'm just waiting on the impact.

Bush was preparing to give a speech to the annual meeting of the Conservative Political Action Conference, or CPAC. The conference is the event of the year for conservative activists; Republican politicians are required to appear and offer their praise of the conservative movement.

Latimer got the assignment to write BushÂ’s speech. Draft in hand, he and a few other writers met with the president in the Oval Office. Bush was decidedly unenthusiastic.

“What is this movement you keep talking about in the speech?” the president asked Latimer.

Latimer explained that he meant the conservative movement — the movement that gave rise to groups like CPAC.

Bush seemed perplexed. Latimer elaborated a bit more. Then Bush leaned forward, with a point to make.

“Let me tell you something,” the president said. “I whupped Gary Bauer’s ass in 2000. So take out all this movement stuff. There is no movement.”

Bush seemed to equate the conservative movement — the astonishing growth of conservative political strength that took place in the decades after Barry Goldwater’s disastrous defeat in 1964 — with the fortunes of Bauer, the evangelical Christian activist and former head of the Family Research Council whose 2000 presidential campaign went nowhere.

Now it was Latimer who looked perplexed. Bush tried to explain.

“Look, I know this probably sounds arrogant to say,” the president said, “but I redefined the Republican Party.”

R Politicans think they can change the people's perception of Rs by taking new positions.

It won't work. The media will never allow that to happen.

People keep thinking there is some strategy that will fix or ameliorate the situation.

There is none. You must look out for yourselves and your loved ones only now. There is no political path out of here. This is the reality, not sour grapes.

We have no way to pay the obligations that have been promised. Ugly stagnation and decline for many years is our future. The bills will come due and there is no way to raise the money required to pay them.

Any talk that doesn't include the above realization is just noise.

Posted by: Angusmc at November 13, 2012 11:33 AM (I5ebA)

You're just making up shit now.

We didn't lose the election because of the message or the way the party is perceived.

We lost because we didn't get as many votes as McCain got due to a fucked up GOTV operation. 

I wish people would quit listening to left wing media telling them that republicans are all but extinct unless they turn into democrats.

Te musto embrackero globolo warmingez et stayez awayito from weapanos dangereros!

"You mean the voters that thought Mitt Romney was going to outlaw women or something? The "intelligence" of those voters?"

We  no  longer  live  in  America.   We  live  in  Freeshitistan.   The  part  that  can  still  be  America  cannot  until  it  divorces  itself  from  the  part  that   sold  its  birth  right  of  Liberty  for  the  mess  of  pottage  given  by  the  Federal  Leviathan. 

The  Free  Shit  Army  are  like  crabs  who  will  always  pull  the  rest  of  us  back  into  the  government's  controlling  bucket.   We  have  nothing  in  common with  these  people that counts  except geography.  They  also  think  our  commonality  lies  in   that  they  think  government is  the  only  thing  that  we all  belong  to.    With  that  very  thought  they  have  broken  faith  with  America.  

Posted by: bellaz at November 13, 2012 11:27 AM (4IKUP)

I live in a place called Porter, TX.  It's between Conroe and Houston.  Look for a subdivision called Cumberland on FM 1314 if you are serious about coming here.  There are quite a few houses that you can get at quite a steal.  I have some detailed knowledge about the subdivision that most real estate agents won't allow you to have (I had a very good one.)  Last two summers the humidity hasn't been that bad due to droughts.  Which presented it's own set of problems but nothing drastic.  If we do have wet summers the humidity can get intense for those that aren't used to it.

Grrr sorry about that last post, Windows 8 and IE 10 have that stupid carriage return issue and I forgot to pull up notepad.

Because they are hypocrites and need to go. Jindal is 100% right.

Yup.

re do people want solutions or is it too late:

My daughter and some of her peers sometimes joke about how the world will get better once the boomers die off.

She may be right.

When society is no longer run by the biggest group of masturbators ever to whine in their dirty diapers, the next group will turn the wheels as best THEY can.

Is this a variant of "let it burn"?  Maybe.

But given that the message lapped up via social media microtargeting campaign was soundbytes of stupid, until schools actually teach skills, facts, and how to think and continue to educate onself, as opposed to how to feel and what to think, it's going to be an uphill battle.  Same with media that is advertainment for the same group, including subsidized public media labelled "culture".

I have hope in a lot of the young people who did vote against Obama--the ones who are trying to start their adult lives in his economy, who are actually WORKING in it and appalled by it.  others will awaken as it continues to...burn.

I believe a lot more of it was due to the Republican Party
looking like SoCon extremists.

Posted by: McAdams at November 13, 2012 11:39 AM (aVSeo)

I believe this more than anything else.  The Donks stroked
this brush real well in the last month of the election.

OK, Republicans.

Explain this to me. Explain to me how attacking billionaire welfare queens instead of impoverished single-mother welfare queens is joining with and turning into democrats.

I give up. Even conservatives are blind to reality. They think they can elect someone who will fix all this.

Posted by: Grey Fox at November 13, 2012 11:07 AM (aJahi)

Lemme make something perfectly clear, my marriage trumps any and everything else. While I may enjoy looking at boobs (who the hell doesn't?), it has no bearing on my view of marriage or my fidelity. I stood before God, family and friends and swore to love, honor and cherish my wife NO MATTER WHAT. And I fucking meant every word of it. If, somehow, I've given the impression that anything less than that is the case, I apologize and hope this sets that damn record straight.

Posted by: Vic at November 13, 2012 11:08 AM (YdQQY)

Dude, the article's at Politico.  Of course they'd run with that.

okay, so you disagree with Jindal, but is it constructive or helpful to knock him? Posted by: soothsayer at November 13, 2012 11:31 AM

Helpful? No. But it's absolutely essential, if you want to be a Grade A Blog Commenter, that you let no opportunity pass without demonstrating how ideological pure you are, surrounded by an army of cowards who simply don't share your commitment to looking tough on the web.

We should approach every accusation about "protecting the rich" with the same statement of fact:

"The Rich?Oh, No- they will be fine. You raise taxes on them, they won't miss it to much- it is the people they employ, the people they would hire, the business relationships and the people employed by them who will suffer."

That is the lesson the ignorant masses need to learn.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 13, 2012 11:43 AM (GsoHv)

Heh. Fucking racist pots.

Posted by: L, just L at November 13, 2012 11:33 AM (0PiQ4)

Sorry... but that is incorrect.  Europe and the Japenese had US to defend them.  We supported both their markets, AND their physical defense during that timeframe... we were the Superpower...

But, as the American economy declines, who defends US?  There is no big brother to dump money into banks to keep us afloat, nor to defend our borders from the War we are currently in with Islam...

2 years.... at the outside, IMO, before serious financial collapse...

Torquewrench @185:

We didn't lose because of the socons, we lost because we ran a candidate who believe, just like Obama, that a government can put a gun to your head and force you to buy health insurance.

Get it through your head, why would any true American vote for either of those POS's?  There is only one reason and that is because the other guy is worse.

Well, we didn't bother to vote, that is why Romney lost.  Quit nominating statists and we might vote.

Jindahl's right.  Who did he support in the primary?  Yeah, the exploding Perry, but who had the nerve to call Social Security a ponzi scheme?  See how that works?  Plain speak.  Claim it first before the opposition can set the narrative.  And fight back by using examples of lefty cronyism.  Oh, and tell the naddering nabobs in the conservative press to shut the fuck up.

"As long as you are tied at the hip to the so-con reactionaries, you are doomed."

So what's the big plan, then?  How do you purge all those so-con reactionaries?  Oaths of allegiance to moderate secularism?  Forcing people to prove their bona fides by publicly pissing on a crucifix?  Demanding a doctor's certificate to prove we've had at least one abortion?  What are you going to do? 

Imagine you are in a struggling blue-collar family that is barely making ends meet and whose salary has remained stagnant for the last decade. How in bleep is this appeal at all attractive to you?

I guess we have to target that voter, without overlapping into the 47% who pay no federal income tax and don't give a shit about taxes or spending.

Frankly, we should get 90% of the married, family vote. We can't get the rest, but  we sure as shit should get the votes of sturggling married couples who have no on to  advocate  for them.

Just  because  51%  of  the  country  voted  for  a  Harvard  trained  retard   who  can't  do  basic  algebra  or  understand  cause  and  effect  means  that  the  laws  of  science and  logic  are  going  to  change.  By  depending   on Obama's "HOPE"  they  are  truly  hopeless.  And they  are  past  the  point  of  no  return  if  they  couldn't  figure  that  out  after  four  years  of  Obama's "HOPE".  

They  now  part  of  a  faith  based  cult  that  are  turning  America  into  Obama's  Jonestown,  and  it  time  for  those  with open  eyes  to  run  for  the jungle.   

Posted by: sven10077 at November 13, 2012 11:54 AM (LRFds)

Sven, you are the biggest straw-man slayer I've met on the HQ. Read my comments. I gladly voted for Romney. I even though he was going to win. Go try and find a single comment where I said we should raise taxes, impose violence on others, etc.

You can't.

You're just projecting.

What a joke.

Instead of spending a billion in two months trying to repair 4 years worth of slander from the other side, why not spend a 100 mil or so in the mean time trying to establish a favorable view in the public, maybe on an issue by issue approach.  And do something about the voter fraud.  Talk about blatant.

What still baffles me about this election cycle...

There was NO GOP outcry against the UnConstitutional Acts of Obama... NO outcry agianst his selective Enforcment of the Law...  No outcry about how YEARS later they still won't come clean on Fast and Furious, and NOW Obama wants Holder to stay as Attorney General? AFTER he was Impeached?

The Republicans should have attacked on the idea of.... oh... DEFENDING THE REPUBLIC?

CJ -- This is just one of the reasons I advocate putting Ed Morrissey out to pasture. To him, politics is a friggin' game, a contest you "win" by twisting your message to appeal to the people whose ideas are found in polls.

McScribbler, once we get done taking all of the traitors out back and putting a bullet in their skulls, we won't have many advocates. Did you read what he said, or just the headline? (Which I often do.)

The gist is what I've been saying: how long must we wait to secure the freaking border? Because the plan around here seems to be: Wait until have total control of government - White House, House, fillibuster-proof Senate - and then we can do everything we want without having  to compromise.

That's the plan right? Hold out for four more years and win total control, right? That's seems like a huge bet. And in the meantime, millions of future Democrats are entering the country.

We seem to have some extremely stupid people here.  Allowing the dollars to follow the child means that states would fund the education of the kid, no matter what school they attended, including Christian schools, home schooling fees, etc.  It would give parents a choice (which Democrats claim to support) on where, and how, their children were educated. 

But that is not a new idea.  Rick Perry proposed it five years ago.  Jindal took the idea from him.

Now, for all you who think it is a crazy idea, let me ask you this: if you were given $12,000 a year to pay for your child's education, would you subject them to a teacher's union run, revisionist, far left education or would you actually send them to a school that met your needs and the needs of your child and take away the influence of the union goons who wind up in rubber rooms?

On the intelligence comment- Understand he is talking to Politico here, he is not going to say the voters were stupid in reelecting Obama.

Why not?  It's about goddamn time the GOP started taking no prisoners.  The voters were stupid and they deserve every bit of ass-raping they get.  What's Piyush afraid of?  That he won't get an invite to the next Heritage Foundation meeting?  That Jonah Goldberg will say something nasty about him?

I'm in the FYLIB camp.  Somebody comes to Jindal with a sob story, he should ask, in public, "did you vote for Obama?  Yes?  Well fuck off, then.  Go ask your Chocolate Crackhead for help."  When the media swine come after him, shame them publicly - "thanks for the question, Candy.  Of course, you were the 'reporter' who covered for Obama when he was lying his ass off during the debates, so you'll understand why I don't answer anything you or your propaganda network ask.  Next!"

Do a town hall - "everybody in here, I'm passing along a piece of paper.  I want you all to write down just how much you have in your wallets and purses right now.  After that, my assistants will take all that money and divide it equally among all of you here.  Oh, you don't like that?  Well, if you voted for Obama, you obviously do like it, so it's time to pay up, assholes."

Fuck the left, fuck the media and fuck the GOP. 

There's a new report making the rounds in the banking industry saying that within 10 years we may be down to 100 or so banks in the U.S. Right now there are over 7,000.  Small banks employ hundreds of thousands of people, give a lot of money to local charities, universities, civic groups and causes, and also lend a lot of money to local entrepreneurs who would not get the time of day from a megabank.  Dodd-Frank is running them all out of business.  Republicans should be on the right side of this, decrying these results.  But guess what, the RNC and the Romney campaign took millions from the big banks and their executives.  The big banks want the competition eliminated.  They are not the friends of the people and the Republican Party should not be their friends.  And I say this as an employee of a semi-big bank that will be one of the 100 that survive.

Jindal is very right about this.  He's a popular Republican governor in a state that has rarely elected Republicans statewide even while voting GOP nationally.  We need to listen to people like him. 

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 13, 2012 11:43 AM (GsoHv)

I bet i am not the only one who doesn't give two shits about what you think.

Why can't we blame Bush in campaigns?

"Just like Bush spent money we don't have and the economy suffered, Obama is spending money we don't have with similiar results."

IT DOES NOT MATTER that the Obama administration is a sucker of big bank cock while funneling taxpayer money to campaign bundlers and favored corporations.

It's the truth, but the truth won't swing votes if the perception remains that the Dems are for the "little guy" and the GOP is for "the rich".

Not while the GOP keeps nominating guys who will never ever hit the democrats on sucking bank cock, lest the bankers get offended and withdraw their cock, because they plan on doing the same thing.

Okay.

I read what Jindal said.

Then I reread it.

Still a little confused by what he meant there...

But I never did buy into the "Too Big To Fail" thing.

That is not a conservative idea.

Nothing...I repeat...nothing, is too big to fail...not even the government.

It is the 'big businesses' that the Unions love, because they are easily unionized.

It is the 'big businesses' that the Dems love...because they pay the most in Employer Taxes such as SocSec/Medicare.

The Dems may demonize 'big business' but they are no friend to 'small business'.

The Dems don't want people to be Independent.

Owning your own small business makes you less dependent, and more of a rebel.

This is why everything that the Dems do, is against small business and against entrepreneurship.

Posted by: SFGoth at November 13, 2012 12:05 PM (dZ756)

My point, exactly....

The Repubs did not learn from the 2008 OR 2010 Elections cycles.

The Party needs to shift from just paying Lip Service to Liberty and Small Government.... to actualy SUPPORTING Liberty and Small Government.

 The mistake most conservatives are making is that the 'war on women' meme underlined the right's often questionable stance on individual freedom and liberty. iow the right heard 'war on women,' and treated the very idea as being ridiculous, while everyone else heard, 'the right is attacking freedom and liberty.' Plus, in the right's derisive response to the meme, other Americans understood your response to proclaim that, 'freedom and liberty is ridiculous.'

 As with many other issues, you saw the headline ...and completely overlooked the sub-text. Many of the left's attacks have that sub-text, a sub-text which implies that the right is against individual freedom and personal liberty. Instead of addressing the bottomline, the sub-text, you attack the headline, all too often offering solutions which further limit individual freedom and personal liberty, when you're not unintentionally dismissing freedom and liberty entirely. Combine this mistake on your part with the left's offer of free stuff from the government ('we'll give you free stuff and more freedom!')...

 wrt many issues, you're almost completely blind to the underlying realities...and the left is taking ruthless advantage of your blindness. To use a boxing analogy, you always see the left handed jab, but you never see the overhand right the left jab is setting up.

We put farmers in the free shit army camp we're done.

FFS farmers are preening welfare queens.

Giant conglomerates like ADM profit billions a year (yeah, so what?) and get hundreds of millions in subsidies for it (that's what). Free Shit Army 24/7/365.

Posted by: Closing Time at November 13, 2012 11:59 AM (1crPI)

Which is why I've been saying we need to get off our asses in between elections and do what the Left has done  to alter America: fight the cultural battles. The real ones, not gay marriage. If you  don't want to do it for the country, do it for purely partisan reasons.

If we own the married vote, which includes Hispanics, and the eventually-to-marry-but-now-single vote, we have a shot at winning without sacrificing principle.

It's been said here before, the elections are now between the Makers and Takers. We need to own the Makers vote. We should own it, easily.

Posted by: BCochran1981 at November 13, 2012 11:47 AM (da5Wo)

Oi. I know that now, and I wasn't trying to be offensive. I also wasn't trying to imply that I had thought you were not faithful to your wife per se - it is just that most married men I know do not openly speak of their admiration for women other than their wives, and given your proclivity for doing just that I sort of figured that you had the rather casual attitude towards marriage that most American have today. I wasn't thinking that you yourself would cheat on your wife, but your defense of the sanctity of someone else's vows - of marriage in the abstract - was a bit of a pleasant surprise.

The only reason I mentioned it was because I was going to be criticizing some other folks and I wanted to say something positive first.

     If I had to give a reason why Romney lost I'd say it was because the country hates Obamacare, and Romney said "Repeal and replace."  That sounded like "No hope, No Change."  And vote fraud.  Lots and lots of vote fraud. 

     If the GOP won't demand voting integrity we're done.  There hasn't been a Republican mayor in Chicago in almost 80 years.  Welcome to the United States of Chicago.

Yep, because the problem is the dependent 47% are paying too much in income taxes. Also, remember kids, we're not raising taxes, we're "closing loopholes".

So your plan is, instead of running on making sure rich people don't cheat on their taxes and end up paying less than poor people, and enacts a conservative flat tax reform, I dunno, what? Run a guy who pays 15% on his taxes, hides money in the Caymens, and runs on cutting the corporate tax rate instead?

Ohhh, GOOD fucking idea there. We don't want to be popular, being popular is too icky for us. Poor people might actually vote for us if we did that, and then we'd be soiled.

Posted by: Obama Fone! at November 13, 2012 12:09 PM (ypzqs)

That's a big part of the problem. No matter how big of a clusterfuck the government program is it's never the program/bureaucrats/Democrats fault. It's the taxpayers are greedy and don't want to help "the poor"

When Romney was asked what loopholes he wanted to cut to even out the rate decrease, he could have gone after corporate welfare. He could have gone after tax shelters for millionaires and he could have gone after special tax breaks for hollywood billionaires.

Or, he could do what he did, not specify anything at all and just ask people to trust him, because Obama sucks, and say 'jobs' 15 times in 2 minutes.

Posted by: Whatev at November 13, 2012 12:12 PM (2t6Gz)

The key is Why have a Tax.... is it to raise money for needed Government services?  or for Social Engineering...

Take... oh... the Dependent Credit.  You have 4 Kids, who all go to school and use Government services... you have MORE than 5 times the Societal Cost of me, as a single Person.... yet YOU pay significantly LESS in Taxes?

Or, the way the House deduction is STRUCTURED.  It gives you a break on the INTEREST you pay... not on the House itself...  Its a big sloppy kiss for BANKS, not for home owners...

Posted by: Butters at November 13, 2012 12:07 PM (NIZHJ)

Folks with Aspergers Syndrome - a mild form of autism. It is currently popular, both as a diagnosis and as an insult by those who get their information in it from Hollywood.

But if our politicians would finally figure out how to shut the fuck up about abortion

This.

"I believe in the sanctity of innocent human life."

End.

One advantage the far left has is that all their constituencies can fit together into one unified effort. Whether itÂ’s unions, race hustlers, greenies, euthanasia practitioners, irreligionists, food police or sex criminals, they can all support massive increases in the size and power of government and its corollary, forcing as many people as possible into dependence on government at as early an age as possible. The less-left party , being scared to seem “extreme”, just sells itself as being 15% less extreme than the more-left party.  The less-left party has advocates for each of three main principles, but no one who really unites those principles into a coherent vision and too often folks who support one pillar barely tolerate one of the other pillars.

My bosses each consider themselves to be conservative Republicans, but whenever thereÂ’s a chance to grab government money, they take it. Principles get sold out too easily.  The bogeys have discipline: they wonÂ’t tolerate anyone who doesnÂ’t toe the line 100% (see Bob Casey).  Vice sells whether itÂ’s advertising tires or policies.

Posted by: Crom at November 13, 2012 12:18 PM (1WKq7)

It should have been, after everything Obama's done.  But the allure of Free Shit is a powerful thing.

Posted by: t-bird at November 13, 2012 12:16 PM (FcR7P)

Heh.

Everyone should pay some tax. And I mean everyone. The kid who gets $12 withheld from his summer job should have to cough up a small portion of that. 11% or 5%. I don't care. But it should be impossible to receive money at the end of the year.

"But nutty socon gaffes about rape, God and abortions are damaging the rest of the party and costing us elections. That part has to stop. It. Has. To. Stop."

You. Can't. Stop. People. Thinking. What. They. Think.

I don't know how you think you can "solve" the so-con problem.  If you don't throw them out, they're going to be there to cause trouble.  You can't chain them in the basement and just let them out on Election Day.  Unless you have some re-education camps in mind, it sounds to me like you are proposing that the GOP turn a large percentage of its members into helots, and that's not going to work.

Posted by: Butters at November 13, 2012 12:18 PM (NIZHJ)

SOME PEOPLE come into a shitload of money and go nuts

Yup drive them hard into FSA camp politically and we're done.

There's nothing "driving" about it. They are what they are, and what they are, are members of the Free Shit Army in good standing.

Pretending they are not Free Shit Army doesn't change the fact that they are.

Hint: No it's not different when your people do it.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 13, 2012 12:16 PM (GsoHv)

Constitution? Racist. Reading? Racist.

Here's what the GOP should do.

F*ck Obama and f*ck Harry Reid.

If they can't do it politically, then do it for love.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 13, 2012 12:22 PM (GsoHv

Amendment V: No person shall be...deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law."

If the baby is a human, the fifth amendment applies to it as much as to us. If it is not a human, why be pro-life?

Posted by: L, just L at November 13, 2012 11:27 AM (0PiQ4)

With all respect, L, that doesn't work.  Because the enemy never sleeps.

We want our lives.  They want control of our lives. 

Some of you guys sound just like the people who were demanding that the Republican Party attack Obama as an America-hating Marxist.  Now you want Republicans to attack the voters who voted for Obama, and just give up trying to win back any of them.  You think everyone that voted for Obama was either bought off, brainwashed, or irredeemedly stupid.  That implies the Republican Party candidate and message were A-OK.  Anyone who says "we're doing it wrong" is a sellout, panderer, or has just bought into the MSM propaganda.

The Republican Party has lost the popular vote in 5 of the last 6 elections.  And arguably won it in 2004 only because the Democrats picked the worst possible candidate and the Republicans assassinated his character and made him unacceptable.  This isn't just about Barack Obama and the "moochers."  We have fucked up the last two times when we had power and have got to make some fundamental changes to convince America to give power back to us.

We could have Benake fly over the inner cities heaving money out of the ass end of a C-130. The ghetto rats would worship us after that.

*I denounce myself for that*

Posted by: Twinkees at November 13, 2012 12:37 PM (NIZHJ)

We already have!

Posted by: torabora at November 13, 2012 12:37 PM (pnL3R)

This would be much cheaper than the programs in place designed to help the same people. But the Dems would want to do both.

Posted by: torabora at November 13, 2012 12:37 PM (pnL3R)

You're probably right though............

http://youtu.be/H_KBjp3YfMo

 The GOP Can't Stay Stuck On Stupid

Challenege accepted

You can say something like "we need more conservatism" but if I ask you to define conservatism you fuckers will argue into the wee hours of the morn. How can we get more if we don't know what it is? Oh, you think you know! All of you think you know, but none of you agree.

Terms like 'liberal' and 'conservative' are cultural/tribal markers. They have no real meaning to speak of. They have been demagogued to pieces, to mean all things to all people, and all the kings horses and all the kings men cannot put them together again. This is why I am no longer conservative, above all else. To say you want conservative or liberal policy, you may as well say you want more "good" policy and less "bad" policy. Conservatism means upwards not downwards, forwards not backwards, and always twirling, twirling, twirling toward freedom.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 13, 2012 12:46 PM (GsoHv)

What's the tenth amendment?  Is that a new show or a new movie or something?  Is it a new twist they're introducing on The Voice?

>>>the inherent tyranny of direct taxes- especially income taxes?

...or the 3% tax on home sales that they built into Obamacare?  

 It's not redistribution.  No way.  

456 I've gotta tell you that photo shopped Petraeus book cover that got on Denver television made me spit tea all over my computer monitor at work.

That. Was. Epic.

--------------

I know, mpfs....that was great, wasn't it?

Kudos to whomever did the photoshop.

I'm wondering if it was an "oops" to put it on the air, of it someone did it on purpose.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at November 13, 2012 12:37 PM (GsoHv)

So, are we arguing tactics or principles? I could easily be persuaded that we need to change tactics, to go for a compromise that will save lives in the short term while laying the foundations for future progress - my big frustration with the pro-life movement is that so many seem so concerned with demonstrating their purity of heart and mind that they lose sight of the end goal of saving lives. That is not what I am hearing right now, though - what I am hearing is that conservatives have to ignore a very great evil evil in order to ensure that everyone has full wallets. Even allowing it to be decided on the state level is adopting the liberal view that it is not a human life - the Bill of Rights applies to the whole country and we do not allow states to decide that slavery, lynch mobs, execution of innocent members of a malefactor's family, and the like are acceptable, so why would be do that for abortion?

Repeal all digital copyright. This is the funding mechanism of the arts and media establishment. This is the primary messaging engine of the Democratic party. It's not Think Progress or some other Soros-funded wonk shop or even the DNC itself. It is every single news and entertainment conglomerate you can think to name. Their Achilles heal is digital copyright. As it is they spend enormous amounts of energy maintaining their tenuous grip on their intellectual property. They know all too well technology has made it possible to cut them out of the loop entirely. For some reason, Republicans have carried their water on this for years helping to pass monstrosities like the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. They received precious little in return while making a convenient scapegoat for the eyes of the youth vote. Declare all digital works to be in the public domain and their power to shape the political narrative becomes roughly proportional to that of, say, Michelle Malkin. For good measure, reform non-digital copyright to apply for a period of ten years or the life of the creator (whichever is shorter) and then pass into the public domain. Suck it, Disney.

Basil 2016.

Lord have mercy!  The entire GOP establishment (& the grassroots) pressured Todd Akin to with draw when there was time to do so?  Set aside that he was always Claire McCaskill's preferred opponent...

What else could the GOP have done? 

And why is it that the Democrats can say all kinds of crazy $hi+ like "revenge" and "put y'all in chains" etc.  and they never have to do any soul searching or image changing or moderating. 

You can't change the culture, no one can.

Except for the Leftists who significantly and demonstrably changed culture in the 20^th century. But no one else can.

But but but, if politicians can't sell the copyright law in exchange for campaign donations how will they rig their incumbancy in perpituity?

They will find another way. Don't worry about it.

Posted by: Berserker at November 13, 2012 12:53 PM (FMbng)

Agreed. Unreachable (for now). Pain must be felt.

Even the horrible economic state right now does not work, due to all the safety nets. The nets have to fail, and they will.

The intellectual property I create- whether on my blog, as a book, or a piece of software I develop- is mine.

Yes it is. But you weren't the first one to think of 'stringing words together into a sentence' and if someone else comes up with it too, compete on the merits. Politicians shouldn't tell you you own the idea and anyone who thinks of it owes you royalties.

>>“Our customers will not be affected because we will continue to serve them from other Hostess Brands bakeries, but sadly this action will result in the permanent closure of three facilities and the loss of 627 jobs,” said Gregory Rayburn, Hostess Brands’ chief executive.

Awesome.  Fuck Unions.

I liked those linked Jindal quotes. I thought he would've made a decent candidate, but didn't run. Maybe next time.

Posted by: kbdabear at November 13, 2012 01:00 PM (wwsoB)

3% loss?

You people are on crack.

Election fraud was at the highest level ever this time around.

You go through the votes one by one and you will find out how massive the fraud was in virginia ohio florida and pennsylvania

>>>how long does a frozen twinkie last?

I can go all night.

IMO, the anti-IP libertarians are misguided. Strong IP protection is an essential part of a rights-driven service economy.

Um, dude, the founders wrote it in to be for a very limited time. Politicians have corrupted it ever since.

We now have companies that specialize in holding 'defensive' copyrights to counter-sue the companies that specialize in sueing people for violating their inescapably broad offensive copyrights.

The system is demonstrably broke and as it exists, the whole thing is about corporate rent seeking. I am not against intellectual property as a concept, and that system as it was originally concieved I imagine could be better than nothing and for the good.

But we would be better off with nothing than what we have now.

Some people with a Jindal Dildo up their ass dont want to accept this but oh well.

Your thoughtful words have given us  much to  ponder. 

How about a buyout?

Democrats buy votes on an ongoing basis every cycle.  This gets proportionately more and more expensive every year.  Knowing the mentality of the people we want to influence, immediate gratification would work much better than what dems offer.

We  offer a buyout to every citizen in the U.S. for their votes using federal money.  The buyout would be based on age and vary between $50,000 and $250,000 per voter.  In exchange for the one-time payment, the voter relinquishes their right to vote for life.

This program would be an immediate boost to the economy, is progressive and would insure conservatives would rule for generations.

We're tired, too, Lili.

CENTCOM  Johnnies constantly suwwound me

They always hound me, with one wequest.

Who can satisfy their lustful habits?

I'm not a wabbit.

I need some we... [takes breath] ...est.

Copyright law protects against copying, not independent creation.

Oh, bullocks.

It reminds me of a lefty debate I read about Obama's drone war. Connor Friedersdorf made a rather good argument - most lefties want to argue about the drone war they'd like to have, in the abstract, and ignore the drone war they actually are having.

It's not about whether or not we should support a hypothetical copyright law that is actually just.

Look at the actual fucking copyright system. The law is bought and sold to the highest bidder. People get copyrights for all sorts of obvious shit they never should have been able to copyright. There are companies that make a living doing absolutely nothing but suing over unused copyrights they bought and stockpiled. Fucking scientific researchers copyright diseases and you have to pay a royalty if you want to research a cure! The system is F.U.B.A.R. and we'd be better off to start from scratch and raze the whole damn system.

Posted by: L, just L at November 13, 2012 01:11 PM (0PiQ4)

"How do we keep together a coalition that is large enough to beat the Dems."

We focus on the subsidiarity principles. Which is why the federal Government need to shrink, redirecting power to the states, and then down to the local communities.

Good idea, but like most of the ideas post-election, it begins with us winning a governing majority to make fundamental change.

“First, win the White House, House and a filibuster-proof Senate. Second, do conservatives stuff. Finally, the nation is saved.”

It doesnÂ’t help us get to that first part.

Which is not what IP is supposed to do- but then target the bastardization of copyright, not copyright itself.

What I am telling you is that the system is so far gone, it would be much easier and much better, and we would be closer to the ideal, if we erradicated the whole thing and focused on trying to re-create the good things, than if we tried to keep it alive and trim off the bad.

The latter approach I assure is completely futile. It will not happen, it will just provide rhetorical cover while the same old shit continues. There's too much inertia that way, too many companies built on milking the system and too much money in it.

The only Democrat policy we should adopt is lying. Tell the people we are giving them circus clowns, less taxes and more spending at the same time, whatever, then start fixing things when we get in. Democrats never attack their own. They even defended Anthony Weiner. They never expect promises to be kept, they just support team D no matter what.

Since the advent of television--

charisma matters.

JFK had it.

I like wonks but I don't think Jindal has it.

Posted by: tasker at November 13, 2012 01:10 PM (r2PLg)

--------------

This!

Exactly so, tasker.

This is what I keep saying.

I like Jindal and I think what he's basically trying to say here is...

"The GOP should not be the party of 'Too Big To Fail'"

But he can't even sell that idea to conservatives.

So how could he sell it on a national level?

The only Presidential Candidates who win anymore...are the ones that are Charismatic on a basic level.

start allowing fist fights on the floor every time some donk implies  republicans are right wing nazis

Posted by: garrett at November 13, 2012 01:15 PM (TL8Jw)

Well originally it was the les paul forum. A friend of mine started it years back when it was just a small handful of us, but then it became infested with libs and became intolerable, so a bunch of us moved on.

My parents are what's wrong. They have lived the American dream. Neither went to college, but they scrimped and saved and started a business. They have a beautiful house with a pool . But their only news source is the  broadcast news. They regurgitate all the dem talking points.

This. 

The moochers need the backing of people like our parentsÂ’ generation to win elections. That generation generally worked hard, generally married before having children, and generally didnÂ’t receive government entitlements until their later years.

But while they lived like Republicans, they  vote Democrat. They still think itÂ’s the party of FDR and JFK.

Without them, liberalism could not have blossomed.

Yes, we should only nominate humans with the approved melanin content for higher office.  Qualifications, beliefs, and capability are  nice, but in the end irrelevant.

Obviously.

Oh, and Free Shit too.  Can't win without Free Shit.

I am not rich but I believe in property rights and I still think envy is a bad thing. Apparently, I am the only one.

Nah. I always tell liberals that I will never be rich, but I never had the urge to blame my lack of money on the fact that the guy across town has too much of it.

Heck, when I was making $14,000 a year I remember arguing with my boss that I didnÂ’t see the fairness in a progressive tax rate.

[singing]

Lili Von Shtupp:  I've been with thousands of men

again and again

they promise the moon

they're always coming and going and going and coming

... and always too soon.

[spoken] Right, girls?

[Jill Kelley and Paula Broadwell, spoken]

Right, Lili!

[Jill Kelley and Paula Broadwell, singing a duet]

We've been with thousands  of men

Again and again

They sing the same tune

They start with Byron and Shelly

Then jump on your belly

And bust your balloons

Aye!

[All, in unison]

We're  tired!

We we start by making sure we're not giving off the signal that we're going to legislate us some morality (see: Not Akin.)

Seems as if weÂ’re the only ones who worry about that.  The government makes me pay for other peopleÂ’s immorality every April 15, and it never seems to have hurt the other party.

Posted by: tsrblke (work) at November 13, 2012 01:34 PM (u1Lwt)

I hear you. We have to be smarter. We face a hostile media that the other party does not have to contend with. Fortunately, the mediaÂ’s influence is dwindling.

SimpleSpeak, even from Jindal, a guy I like.

Look, Dems say stupid things, radical and stupid things, all the time.

How do the media and pop culture guys on tv treat them?  With a smile and pat on the back.

You change absolutely nothing w/out first undercutting the people who deliver the news to the majority of the Bell Curve who don't dig for anything on their own.

I still think the only way around this mess is to begin to go after the lack of journalistic integrity and professionalism on the part of the reporters and their bosses.  Jake Tapper, one of the "better ones" as a MSM reporter,  is still missing in action on the Benghazi story, saying just enough about it that he can claim he is "covering it" but that's it.

It's sad and unfortunate that the great reporting that the two Fox reporters have done on the story and sad that the Bret Baier News Hour are undercut by other shows on Fox News Network.   Sad too that people don't know what a great program Neil Cavuto has (if just a smidgen more of the populace listened to a show like that once a couple of months, we'd have won the election just by educating people a bit about how an economy operates) because "Fox" is considered some kind of tabloid network by those who never tune in.

Go to Steve Sailer's blog, http://isteve.blogspot.com/, read his archives about immigration and Hispanic voting patterns, read his recent posts, in fact, get lost in a guy who's a great analyst of data, and learn why it's futile to believe that in your lifetime, no matter your age, you'll not see Hispanics voting GOP.  (Oh, and recall that after Reagan gave amnesty, we still lost more of the percentage of Hispanic votes.)

This is not a Democrat or Republican debate, it is a conflict between an increasingly powerful elite harnessing the resources of the federal government for the purpose of milking dry an oppressed middle class.

That's what I see. I don't give a fuck about left/right anymore, the name of the game is up/down.

Look at the lower class we might call moochers. That is what the endgame for you looks like. The elites will shove the middle class into the lower class and shut down class mobility to protect their little tower.

Many moochers are moochers because the elites have worked for decades to make sure mooching is the only viable way for them to achieve sustainence. They have no other options. They live in a blighted community with no jobs and no money and their public school didn't teach hardly half of them to read. For a reason. They're Eloi.

That sort of rhetoric works for democrats because people are not so stupid, they see it going on and they know it is happening.

The democrats blaim it all on republicans. But dumbass republicans just stick their head in the sand and deny it exists, which in light of dem allegations, makes them look guilty. And half of them are guilty.

But if you say these things, you "sound like a democrat". There's a reason why it resonates! It's true, just not quite the way they make it out to be. But you cannot just stick your head in the sand and say we have a free market just because you want to believe we have free market. We have no free market, we have a rigged game that oppresses the poor. Acknowledging it is not endorsing it. It exists. Simple as that.

We want a free market, but just to pretend we have one isn't a solution for what to do about cronyism. If we are ever to get to a free market, we have to acknowledge the fixed market, what it is, what's wrong with it, and what needs to change. Republicans apparently are afraid to address cronyism. They just want to spout 20th century rhetoric and sloganeering about America being free and pretend there is no problem.

More populism and class warfare.  Yeah, that's what we need in this nation right now. 

Thou shalt not covet  -- (shit God and Moses said, Chapter 1, verse 3 ) 

Jindal.. Jindal??

Now that's a name I haven't heard...

Someone again beat me to it:

Jindal sat this one out. Where was he a year ago?

Now he gets on stage?

Now he speaks?

He may be right, but fuck him.

Posted by: eman at November 13, 2012 11:21 AM (sRus3

These fuckers want me to believe instead of losing, we just came in second.

Whaaat??

More populism and class warfare. Yeah, that's what we need in this nation right now.

Thou shalt not covet --(shit God and Moses said, Chapter1, verse3 )

The party can propigate all the pretty popaganda popular around the people till their purple in the peehole.

Piss on them.

open up a cash based business model and help the moochers cheat....

burn it don't just watch.

Working on it. I'm gonna get me some foodstamps and a cash side business.

The party can propigate all the pretty popaganda popular around the people till their purple in the peehole.

So your prefered alternative is unpopular propaganda? Pretend their's no problem, that in the Socialist State of America (for decades and counting) the rich don't use their political connections to destroy competition?

Are you just gonna claim that private profit and subsidized loss for the well connected doesn't exist? Too big too fail. To important to be equal.

And for the poor, (meager) subsidized profit and private loss - all the better to discourage them from trying anything uppity.

Posted by: MrScribbler, banned at TepidAir at November 13, 2012 12:40 PM (yKUrR)

Libs have not "convinced a majority" of voters  of anything.  Libs  simply got a "majority" of frauduland votes. The REAL majority voted for Romney.